Amazon Online Pvt. Ltd., Argentum Management v. Goodluck Millenium Trading & Marketing
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Companies Act, 2013 ss. 391, 394
Judgment
Mr. Akshay Vani for Applicant MINUTES OF THE ORDER UPON the Application of the Applicant Company above named by a Summons for Directions AND UPON HEARING Mr. Akshay Vani, Advocate for Applicant Company, AND UPON READING the Affidavit dated 7th January 2009 of Mrs. Kanchan Dhuri, the Director of the Applicant Company, in support of Summons for Directions, IT IS ORDERED:-
that the convening and holding of the meeting of the Equity Shareholders of the Applicant Company to consider and approve the proposed Arrangement embodied in the Scheme of Amalgamation of Amazon Online Pvt. Ltd., Argentum Management Services Pvt. Ltd., Claridges Infotech Pvt. Ltd., Goodluck Millennium Trading & Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Tagg Cybertech Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as IOL Cybertech Pvt. Ltd.), Kohinoor Merchandise Pvt. Ltd., Moksh Infotech Pvt. Ltd., Nebula Software Pvt. Ltd. and Primier Millennium Trading & Marketing Pvt. Ltd. the Transferor Companies with Kenwood Infotech Pvt. Ltd, the “Transferee Company” is dispensed with in view of the consents given by all the Equity Shareholders of the Applicant 2 Company, which are annexed as Exhibits “B1 to B4” to the Affidavit in support of the Summons for Direction.
that the convening and holding of the meeting of the Unsecured Creditors of the Applicant Company to consider and approve the proposed arrangement embodied in the Scheme of Amalgamation of the Transferor Companies with the Transferee Company is dispensed with in view of the consents given by all the Unsecured Creditors of the Applicant Company, which are annexed as Exhibits “D1 to D 2” to the Affidavit in support of the Summons for Direction; Company Judge 3
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Companies Act, 2013 — ss. 391, 394.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 20 Feb 2009. The bench was S VAZIFDAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.